You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
MySploofus
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message



Pages:  1    


caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.4 - Posts: 21605)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 1:31 PM

THE US CENSUS

The census report has always seemed like a very benign thing to me. Perhaps that is because I have always been in the racial majority and did not pay much attention to the political scene. From what I am hearing it is becoming a politically "hot topic". The reason seems to be that the White House wants the census reports to come directly to them-Rahm Emanuel specifically. Don't know if this is the first time the person appointed to receive these reports has been bypassed or not. It appears that one can control Congressional Districts by redrawing the lines of the district as they seem to be quite arbitrary. Some think it might also have huge impact on the electoral college. The whole fracas seems to be about one of the major parties being in control of everything. From the history that I know don't believe anyone thought that a good idea but it most likely has happened numerous times shifting from one party to another. Would be interested in intelligent folks comments on the census and how it affects our government whether good or bad-thanks- Linda

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 105.1 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 1:56 PM

Well, with computers gerrymandering of House districts has become much easier. It has produced lots and lots of safe seats occupied by conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats who can easily win their party's primary and stay in Congress forever. Moderates in many cases need not apply because wingers in both parties show up to vote in primaries.

This is just one of the factors that has produced our toxic, highly partisan politics. Gobs of corporate money and well-funded special interests are two others.

(Hardly any effect on Presidential elections, Linda)

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.4 - Posts: 21605)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 7:31 PM

Census can determine money districts receive. Big difference seems to amount to the fact that Constitution says census is an actual head count. Utah where the guy who brought the current issue up seems was denied one congressional rep because the Mormons that were out of the country doing missionary work could not be counted. Now the Democrats seem to want some kind of estimated count based on some kind of sample since they often represent folks in areas where actual counts are hard to make. Republicans are particularly offended as before Richardson withdrew his name the President had made it quite clear that one of his responsibilities would be the census. Now that Gregg is up for possible approval a black congresswoman actually shouted at White House staffers because of what Gregg writes off as due to his youth he and one point actually advocated the census be done away with. The president has not actually said that it will be in Rahms hands but language to the effect that he is looking closely at the process and folks not knowing what that might mean is bringing the apprehension. Andy, some seem to think that census count could affect the Electoral College and thus the Presidency. The count is not until 2010 so much time to argue and bicker, I guess Linda

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 105.1 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 7:38 PM

I'm not going to worry about it.

chickfbref1
Chickfbref1  (Level: 120.7 - Posts: 2012)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 9:11 PM

The Electoral College is an idea that has long since passed it's expiration date. Useless, moronic and huge waste of money. To this day I don't understand why, in this nation, we continue to use it. May as well forgo the calculator and bring back the abacus.

The census is another one that puzzles me completely. We pay taxes, they count our "dependents", can't we just, umm, dunno, combine the two systems and whoever pays taxes (with SSNs) gets counted? Again, archaic and an huge waste of cashola.

HRH...Me.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.4 - Posts: 21605)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 9:34 PM

LOL Really like your analysis, Chick. It adds humor to something very boring and it makes sense too -thanks-Linda

redwingchick
Redwingchick  (Level: 91.1 - Posts: 420)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 9:54 PM

Chick, if not for the electoral college the more populated states (New York and California, specifically) would elect the President and he would most likely always be a Dem. The electoral college gives the less populated states a voice.

chickfbref1
Chickfbref1  (Level: 120.7 - Posts: 2012)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 10:11 PM

Chick2,

Contrary to popular belief, there are many "blue" states that actually have a ton of "red" voters. If each vote counted, in and of itself it would eliminate that happening on a statewide basis. The same damn thing happens, no matter how you slice the pie, it's still a pie. The electoral college is based on population...not like the Senate. SOOOO...the whole election is based on popular vote anyway, except for anomalies that happen, like dangling chads in Florida. (I'd love to meet this Chad person someday)

She with the most votes should win. Not based on how entirely screwed up one state's election process is.

HRH...Me.

chickfbref1
Chickfbref1  (Level: 120.7 - Posts: 2012)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 10:17 PM

Oh and I am really confused as to why someone from a less populated states vote should count more than mine....that one perplexes me too.

I pay more taxes per square foot of house, land and road, so why shouldn't my vote equal two of those in less populated areas (just to argue the counterpoint).

HRH...Me.

gerryn
Gerryn  (Level: 18.7 - Posts: 141)
Mon, 9th Feb '09 11:20 PM

Gees.... I hate to admit, but I actually agree with you. ....Hell has frozen over.

sandracam
Sandracam  (Level: 149.3 - Posts: 4190)
Tue, 10th Feb '09 12:37 AM

What's that song? "a Mother and Daughter Reunion is Only a Message Away". True what you guys say though.

fudypatootie
Fudypatootie  (Level: 197.5 - Posts: 1302)
Tue, 10th Feb '09 12:43 AM

The census does much more than count folks, though. Since the number of Representatives in the House is set, then where people are living becomes very important in determining how many reps each state gets. Then, on a state level, the individual districts those reps come from is also based on those numbers. It is generally attempted to set each district so it is roughly equal in terms of Dems and Repubs, but the Gerrymandering mentioned previously screws with those ratios. Since the Dems are in charge of the whole shebang right now, the fears of Gerrymandering have risen, especially since the Congress has always been in charge of the census in the past. I don't know why anyone thinks Rahm Emanuel should be in charge of the thing. ???

It has been my experience that, like the arguments between Dems and Repubs, those who are in favor of and those who oppose the Electoral College cannot make the other side see their own point. I'm pro-EC but I'm not going to argue why as it won't change your mind.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.4 - Posts: 21605)
Tue, 10th Feb '09 1:48 AM

Thought of many of these arguments after going to bed but too lazy to get up again. Do believe Utah and states like it would not like not having voice in determining the Presidency. Incidentally, am sure you are aware that there have been several cases where the popular vote did not coincide with the Electoral College vote for the very reason that some way back thought it important to give less populated states a voice in choosing there President. . Since it was the guy from Utah that brought this all up on TSK's favorite Fox News and is a hot topic-he most likely sees many examples of having when politicizing the process might not be good for his state and others like it like funds received and number of members in Congress by how the votes are counted and who does the counting.-Linda

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 105.1 - Posts: 9952)
Tue, 10th Feb '09 3:22 AM

Well, the EC assures that a President must have wide support.

However, election science has reached the point where the campaigns know well in advance which very few battleground states will decide the whole thing. So they pour the bulk of their resources into them and craft their campaigns to woo the voters of those few states, and instead of having a national election we have 5 critical mini-elections that tip the balance.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.4 - Posts: 21605)
Tue, 10th Feb '09 6:49 AM

Much truth in that too, Andy. Believe the presidential thing was only a side thought to the Utah guy. He was much more interested in determining the number of Congressman from each state by who controls the census and how that census is figured and counted- Linda

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.4 - Posts: 21605)
Thu, 12th Feb '09 4:47 PM

May not be important to you but it is to me. Believe it should be important to everyone-but your choice. Gregg-the Republican guy-just removed his name from nomination of Secretary of Commerce His statement gave two reasons the first being he could not support the stimulus package or whatever you chose to call it as it now stand. His second reason and believe most significant is that the White House has removed the US census from the Commerce Dept. When the census was in control of Commerce- it counted actual noses. Commerce secretary is responsible to the Legislature and the Presidency. The process is open and transparent. Moving it into the White House makes in political and Democrats are in favor of census estimates based on some kind of computer model. In order to move the census it has to be done by one of two process SURPRISE but both depend on a Legislative vote. The process then becomes secret and in Rahm's hands and he can determine how congressional lines are drawn and based on that which districts get more money. Doesn't sound "Open and Transparent" to me but beginning not to surprise me sorry to say- Linda (as a side note the President just lost another pick not because this guy had tax problems or was a lobbyist but he did not like what he saw happening)

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 105.1 - Posts: 9952)
Thu, 12th Feb '09 4:55 PM

Linda, I think it is true that the Dems want to use estimates, but each state draws its own Congressional districts. I agree that moving the Census to the WH looks very political.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.4 - Posts: 21605)
Thu, 12th Feb '09 6:24 PM

Doesn't just LOOK political. Another Campaign promise to have any bill to be open for public viewing 5 days before the President signed in has already been broken twice. And it is a sure thing that he will sign this stimulus thing as soon as it hits his desk and the language hasn't even been finalized yet because of some Democratic in-fighting so it will not be voted on until over the weekend and then signed immediately and the legislature themselves will most likely not read it let alone having the public access for 5 days. He also promised not to let the kind of negotiations go on behind closed doors like they certainly have been doing for many days Think "the rubber has hit the road" between campaign and governing. Linda

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 105.1 - Posts: 9952)
Fri, 13th Feb '09 1:56 PM

Linda, it was apparent in July that Obama was probably not going to fulfill his promise of a new politics.


Pages:  1    



Copyright © 2003-2016 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus